Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

FortiCNAPP vs Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 18, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

FortiCNAPP
Ranking in Container Security
30th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (41st), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (18th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (26th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (16th), Compliance Management (10th)
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Se...
Ranking in Container Security
20th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of FortiCNAPP is 2.7%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is 2.1%, down from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes2.1%
FortiCNAPP2.7%
Other95.2%
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

SK
Software Engineer at a university with 5,001-10,000 employees
Improving security insights has been helpful but inconsistent vulnerability tracking needs attention
The vulnerability part is not systematically organized; it is all clumsy in the web UI, and it is not user-friendly. Regarding improvements, the vulnerability part, recent changes with user management, and Fortinet IM coming into place, which is not helpful at all because it cuts out the automation part, are the most important things. Lacework FortiCNAPP should have a new clean UI and ease of access for the users as that should be the main concern. There are limitations regarding the scalability of Lacework FortiCNAPP. There are also more limitations with integrations like GitHub or any other pipeline, CI/CD, or ISD. It is glitchy and works well only sometimes, and most of the time, the reports or other things are not properly calculated or circulated with the teams.
Daniel Stevens - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineer at Galley
Offers easy management and container connection with HTTPS, but the support needs to improve
I have experience with the solution's setup in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and our company has assisted in the development of a cluster in a research department, but we didn't start from scratch because we have IT professionals who have installed Kubernetes across 12 nodes of a cluster and a new environment can be created for a new platform. I also had another setup experience of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes in Portugal where I had to implement the solution in a cluster of 22 computer servers, which was completed with assistance from the IT department of the company. The initial setup process of the solution can be considered as difficult. The setup process involves using the permissions, subnets and range of IPs, which makes it complex. Deploying Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes takes around eight to ten hours for new clusters. The solution's deployment can be divided into three parts. The first part involves OpenStack, where the cluster's resources need to be identified. The second part involves virtualizing assets and identifying other physical assets, for which OpenStack, Kubernetes, or OpenShift are used. The third part of the deployment involves dividing the networks into subnetworks and implementing automation to deploy the microservices using Helm. The number of professionals required for the solution's deployment depends upon the presence of automated scripts. Ideally, two or three professionals are required to set up Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"For the most part, out-of-the-box, it tells you right away about the things you need to work on. I like the fact that it prioritizes alerts based on severity, so that you can focus your efforts on anything that would be critical/high first, moderate second, and work your way down, trying to continue to improve your security posture."
"There are many valuable features that I use in my daily work. The first are alerts and the event dossier that it generates, based on the severity. That is very insightful and helps me to have a security cap in our infrastructure. The second thing I like is the agent-based vulnerability management, which is the most accurate information."
"The most valuable aspects are identifying vulnerabilities—things that are out there that we aren't aware of—as well as finding what path of access attackers could use, and being able to see open SSL or S3 buckets and the like."
"Lacework is helping a lot in reducing the noise of the alerts. Usually, whenever you have a tool in place, you have a lot of noise in terms of alerts, but the time for an engineer to look into those alerts is limited. Lacework is helping us to consolidate the information that we are getting from the agents and other sources. We are able to focus only on the things that matter, which is the most valuable thing for us. It saves time, and for investigations, we have the right context to take action."
"The compliance reports are definitely most valuable because they save time and are accurate. So, instead of relying on a human going through and checking or providing me with a report, I could just log into Lacework and see for myself."
"The best feature, in my opinion, is the ease of use."
"The machine learning capability in Lacework FortiCNAPP is used for threat detection, and automated policy recommendation helps to improve my security measures in general."
"Polygraph compliance is a valuable feature. In our perspective, it delivers significant benefits. The clarity it offers, along with the ability to identify and address misconfigurations, is invaluable. When such issues arise, we promptly acknowledge and take action, effectively collaborating with our teams and the responsible parties for those assets. This enables us to promptly manage problems as soon as they arise."
"The benefit of working with the solution is the fact that it's very straightforward...It is a perfectly stable product since the details are very accurate."
"The most beneficial security feature of the product revolves around the areas of vulnerability and configuration."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."
"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"The technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
 

Cons

"Visibility is lacking, and both compliance-related metrics and IAM security control could be improved."
"The configuration and setup of alerts should be easier. They should make it easier to integrate with systems like Slack and Datadog. I didn't spend too much time on it, but to me, it wasn't as simple as the alerting that I've seen on other systems."
"There are a couple of the difficulties we encounter in the realm of cybersecurity, or security as a whole, that relate to potentially limited clarity. Having the capacity to perceive the configuration aspect and having the ability to contribute to it holds substantial advantages, in my view. It ranks high, primarily due to its role in guaranteeing compliance and the potential to uncover vulnerabilities, which could infiltrate the system and introduce potential risks. I had been exploring a specific feature that captured my interest. However, just yesterday, I participated in a product update session that announced the imminent arrival of this feature. The feature involves real-time alerting. This was something I had been anticipating, and it seems that this capability is now being integrated, possibly as part of threat intelligence. While anomaly events consistently and promptly appear in the console, certain alerts tend to experience delays before being displayed. Yet, with the recent product update, this issue is expected to be resolved. Currently, a comprehensive view of all policies is available within the console. However, I want a more tailored display of my compliance posture, focusing specifically on policies relevant to me. For instance, if I'm not subject to HIPAA regulations, I'd prefer not to see the HIPAA compliance details. It's worth noting that even with this request, there exists a filtering mechanism to control the type of compliance information visible. This flexibility provides a workaround to my preference, which is why it's challenging for me to definitively state my exact request."
"The solution lacks a cohesive data model, making extracting the necessary data from the platform challenging. It uses its own LQL query language, and each database across different layers and modules is structured differently, complicating correlation efforts. Consequently, I had to create extensive custom reports outside Lacework because their default dashboards didn't communicate risk metrics. They're addressing these issues by redesigning their tools, including introducing the dashboard, which is a step closer to actionable insights but still needs refinement."
"Its integrations with third-party SIEMs can be better. That is one of the things that we discussed with them."
"Lacework lacks remediation features, but I believe they're working on that. They're focused on the reporting aspect, but other features need to improve. They're also adding some compliance features, so it's not worth saying they need to get better at it."
"I would like to see a remote access assistance feature. And the threat-hunting platform could be better."
"The vulnerability part is not systematically organized; it is all clumsy in the web UI, and it is not user-friendly."
"The deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"They're trying to convert it to the platform as a source. They are moving in the direction of Cloud Foundry so it can be easier for a developer to deploy it."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."
"The solution lacks features when compared to some of the competitors such as Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and has room for improvement."
"The tool's command line and configuration are hard for us to understand and make deployment complex. It should also include zero trust, access control features and database connectivity."
"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"The solution's price could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"My smaller deployments cost around 200,000 a year, which is probably not as expensive as Wiz."
"The pricing has gotten better. That scenario was somewhat unstable. They have a rather interesting licensing structure. I believe you get 200 resources per "Lacework unit." It was difficult, in the beginning, to figure out exactly what a "resource" was... That was a problem until about a year or so ago. They have improved it and it has stabilized quite a bit."
"It is slightly expensive. It depends on how big your environment is, but it is expensive. Right now, we are spending a lot of money. We have covered all of the cloud providers and most of our colocation facilities as well, so we cannot complain, but it is slightly expensive. It is not super expensive."
"The licensing fee was approximately $80,000 USD, per year."
"The price of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is better than Palo Alto Prisma."
"The pricing model is moderate, meaning it is not very expensive."
"We purchase a yearly basis license for the solution."
"It's a costly solution"
"Red Hat offers two pricing options for their solution: a separate price, and a bundled price under the OpenShift Platform Plus."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
881,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
University
6%
Financial Services Firm
27%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Lacework?
My smaller deployments cost around 200,000 a year, which is probably not as expensive as Wiz.
What needs improvement with Lacework?
The vulnerability part is not systematically organized; it is all clumsy in the web UI, and it is not user-friendly. Regarding improvements, the vulnerability part, recent changes with user managem...
What is your primary use case for Lacework?
The major use case for Lacework FortiCNAPP is for security. I'm using it for security internally for my company.
What needs improvement with Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
From an improvement perspective, I would like to create new policies in the tool, especially if it is deployed for the prevention part, but currently, we need to do it manually. I hear that Palo Al...
What is your primary use case for Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
I use the solution in my company for vulnerability management, configuration management, compliance, safety handling, and everything else.
What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
The tool's policy management supports our company's compliance efforts since any corporate entity or enterprise must follow specific regulations, which include periodic analysis and configuration r...
 

Also Known As

Polygraph, FortiCNP, Lacework
StackRox
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

J.Crew, AdRoll, Snowflake, VMWare, Iterable, Pure Storage, TrueCar, NerdWallet, and more.
City National Bank, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Find out what your peers are saying about FortiCNAPP vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.